To judge people for supporting MJ?

[lightningatmidnight]

No doubt this will rub some people up the wrong way, but when I see people enjoying the new Michael Jackson movie or generally dismissing the abuse he perpetrated as ‘he was a child himself’, I immediately dislike them and consider them supporters of child abuse. Having read the testimonies of the victims and the multiple witnesses to his inappropriate grooming behaviour, I have no doubt in my mind that he was a child groomer and abuser and people’s support of him disgusts me. Just unfollowed someone on Instagram for posting about their enjoyment of the new movie and what a legend he is. AIBU?

I've heard people defend Jimmy Saville. There are bizarre people in this world ready to protect pedophiles and child abuse.

What made me think he is innocent is that his doctor recorded mj while mj was heavily sedated on drugs.

Mj is rambling on. In the video, even while sedated, MJ is talking about wanting to help children because he understands them. He says that he wants to help them because he understands their pain. He understands them because he didnt have a childhood etc

I just want to check this. We all think that sharing a bed with a child that is not ours - is weird.

Is it a crime? It cant be classed as a crime or he would have been convicted for it. Seeing as he admitted to doing it on camera

Whilst I agree it's not a crime in itself, I was saying it to show MJ can't be compared to teachers and other people who surround themselves with children on a daily basis. As it's nothing like the same thing at all!

He was a difficult man to understand.

He caused a lot of his own misfortune.

All of us would not have children in our beds. I wouldnt do it anyway. It doesnt seem right

I ESPECIALLY wouldnt do it if i was famous and rich. As obviously people would be looking for stories on me, it could ruin my reputation and im leaving myself open to being sued

I EVEN more wouldnt go on camera and say "ive had lots of children in my bed" to martin bashir. What was he thinking. Of course that was going to lead to an investigation

He seemed to be so sure that what he was doing was right - that he lost all sense of reality and consequences

I've realised there's an age range of people going WTF and I'm in it at 52 - a bit older and you heard the music and loved it before any of the allegations, a bit younger and the allegations stopped being mentioned because he died.
But those of us who lived through lurid headlines and the articles are reacting like Garry Glitter is back in fashion.
Utterly Baffled.
It's making me go back and rethink what I took on board back then and be more critical of what I took as truth but also suspicious and wary of the whitewash right now.

Peter Andre proudly put a picture on his FB that his son drew of MJ. Just odd. Why would you promote your children choosing a nonce to draw?

My son has seen the MJ movie and we had a discussion about why he would choose to support this film. I still don't understand it and he couldnt explain why.

Heartening to see 2/3 agree with you OP

So many people just think the fact he's a pedophile is irrelevant or they just say 'it was never proved'. It's actually disgusting. Can't stand him or his music (or people that like him).

I guess he was never convicted? So some people think: no conviction, no problem

If your child was sexually abused, would you just move on and be quiet about it as long as you got enough cash?

Some people would if the alternative is to put your child through a trial in the full glare of the world’s attention.

You can’t read anything into settlements. It doesn’t tell you anything about either side.

People are dense sometimes. Jimmy Saville was never convicted. OJ Simpson was found not guilty. Nicole Brown-Simpson’s family got a payout after her death, does that mean they were only interested in money, and OJ was not responsible for her death? Prince Andrew paid off his victim. Was Virginia Guiffre (RIP) just after his money? A shockingly high percentage of rapes go unpunished. Would you let your son share a bed with Michael Jackson? If not, why not? He was a child abusing creep. Who unfortunately was responsible for some absolute bangers.

How anyone could watch James Safechuck on Leaving Neverland and not believe him baffles me. Yes, there were inconsistencies, but they were young children. Children are not known for their accurate narration, or their ability to recall facts and dates. Especially if they have experienced extreme trauma. MJ possessed books containing pictures of naked children, filled his house with toys, had a couple of marriages of convenience to make himself appear normal and hung around with prepubescent boys, who he dropped when they aged out. Someone capable of shrewd business deals, and propelling themselves to be one of the most famous people on the planet is not “a boy trapped in a man’s body”. Absolutely gross.

I have no interest in seeing it and think he probably was guilty, but it's only my opinion. There's no legal proof which means someone else is entitled to think he's innocent.

I think assuming everyone seeing the movie supports chidk abuse is frankly ridiculous and absurd.

@OneDreamyGreenMentorrather than put my child through a very public trial and be vilified by MJ supporters, I probably would. Then spend the money on decent therapy for my child. I don’t blame the parents in taking the money at all. They knew they wouldn’t stand a chance against him.

There is a difference though. Jimmy Saville was never tried in a court. Michael was and was found to be not guilty of that case

I even think there is a difference between MJ and OJ.

OJ was found not guilty yes. But there is blood evidence that strongly suggests that OJ did it.

In the Gavin Arvizo case, there was no strong evidence that suggested that MJ did it.

Gavins family asked MJ would he meet Gavin as Gavin was sick. Gavins mother lied and said that MJ wouldnt let her leave neverland. His mother had also previously tried to get money out of someone

@Scarlettjune and OJ? Was he a poor misunderstood weirdo? Oscar Pistorius was originally found not guilty of murder. R Kelly was found not guilty of sex with a minor, and was later found guilty of sex trafficking. MJs lack of convictions means absolutely nothing.

@Scarlettjune oh I see. So Gavin’s family asked for it by requesting a meeting with him. And his mum might have a questionable character. These obviously point to MJ’s innocence.

I don’t agree that the allegations are true, so I disagree generally with your viewpoint. For example, one of the families only made claims after he stopped giving them money and access, and two of the claimants had different stories until getting the same lawyer. To me he was clearly ace and hugely mentally naive. He felt like a child and he feared adults’ intentions so he befriended children. It was very inappropriate but not because he fancied them. He just had mental problems

@raisinglittlepeople12 no, he wasn’t. He was not naive 😂. He groomed his victims, families and the public into thinking he was Peter Pan. Genuine question: if your neighbour had an atrocious childhood, was beaten by his father and forced to go out and earn money for the family at a young age, would you defend this person choosing to have sleepovers with prepubescent children as a adult? Even if they tell you that sharing a bed with children is a beautiful thing, and an act of love. Even if they aren’t related to them. If not, why not?

Even his daughter and sister thinks he’s guilty ffs.

A lot of things in that case suggest that he was innocent in that particular case.

Im interested to hear your opinion.

What happened in that case that made you think he was guilty of that case?

Yanbu. At all.

His daughter and sister do not think he is guilty.

Disagree. It’s not the job of the general public to ‘go educate themselves’, form opinions, and witch hunt people they have suspicions about. That is the job of legal professionals and the justice system.

@Scarlettjune he originally denied he was abused. That’s what convinced me. He was asked by a teacher if MJ had abused him, and denied it. And he has since stayed pretty much out of the spotlight. Hasn’t sold his story. His parents were absolutely not upstanding characters, but that doesn’t mean Gavin wasn’t a victim. Regardless of my opinion, how can you not conclude that he was an abuser, based on the evidence (not just limited to the Arvizo trial). MJ admitted to sharing beds with young boys. Outside of a close family connection, that is not normal behaviour. Is R Kelly innocent because he was previously acquitted of a similar crime?